![]() | ![]() |
Astron. Astrophys. 341, 912-917 (1999) 4. DiscussionObviously, both comets, 26P/Grigg-Skjellerup and 73P/Schwassmann-Wachmann 3, have a very small size as compared to other periodic and non-periodic comets (see Meech 1998). In fact, they are among the smallest nuclei of short-period comets and only 46P/Wirtanen (Boehnhardt et al. 1996) and 45P/Honda-Mrkos-Padajowskaja (Lamy et al. 1996) seem to be even smaller objects. Our equivalent radius estimation of 1.5 km for 26P/GS is larger
than the one determined by radar observations (Kamoun 1983, Kamoun et
al. 1996), but it is smaller than the values deduced from other
ground-based CCD photometry by Birkle & Boehnhardt (1992; 2-3 km)
and by Meech (1998; 2.9 km). Unfortunately, GIOTTO measurements could
not be used for the size estimation of this nucleus. Considering the
uncertainty of the radii from the CCD photometry, we conclude that
this nucleus is either of non-spherical shape with a maximum axis
ratio (small-to-large) of 0.5 and/or it has a rather variable surface
albedo (the large crust coverage of the surface - see discussion below
- makes this scenario less likely). The latter axis ratio is in
disagreement with the one determined by Sitarski (1992; 0.7) from an
analysis of the non-gravitational forces on the cometary orbit. The
larger axis ratio (0.9) determined from our lightcurve of the comet
could be due to a different viewing geometry of the effective nucleus
cross section. In summary, although the exact value of the axis ratio
may still be debatable, it is very likely that Comet 26P/GS has a
non-spherical nucleus. The rotation of the nucleus seems to be longer
than 12 h, a conclusion supported by our photometry of the nucleus
lightcurve. The observed coma fans (Birkle & Boehnhardt 1992,
Fulle et al. 1993) are at least in qualitative agreement with a fast
rotation period of the order of one day or less. Using our value for
the nucleus size (1.5 km) and model calculations for the gas release
from water ices (Huebner 1992), one can conclude that the water
production rate observed during the GIOTTO encounter period
(6-7 Our 1.1 km radius for 73P/SW3 gives only an upper limit for the
size of this comet (because of the light contamination from the weak
coma and tail). It is, however, in surprisingly good agreement with
the radius value which is obtained from the visual brightness
estimations of the central coma condensation (considered to represent
the nucleus) made by Baldet during the close approach of this comet to
Earth in 1930 (Baldet 1930a,b). Sekanina et al. (1998) calculated a
radius of about 1 km from this rather coarse visual photometry of the
comet. Obviously, 73P/SW3 had a very small nucleus already before it
broke apart in 1995 (Boehnhardt & Käufl 1995; Sekanina et al.
1998 and references therein). If the sub-nuclei can be detected after
the dust and gas emission of the split fragments has ceased, it may be
possible to measure and compare directly - for the first time ever -
the size of the parent body with those of its fragments. Shortly
before break-up in 1995 the comet was hyperactive (Sekanina et al.
1998) as can be concluded from the observed OH production rates
(Crovisier et al. 1996). The effective radius to support this activity
is more than 2 km (Sekanina et al. 1998) which is at least a factor 2
larger than our upper limit. The former authors suggest that
evaporating icy grains may have contributed a significant amount of OH
in the outburst phase before the break-up of the comet. Considering
the fact that during the past apparition the lightcurve of the comet
followed the normal development until the outburst in August/September
1995 and assuming a proportional down-scaled water production rate as
compared with the outburst level (which was
22.2 ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() © European Southern Observatory (ESO) 1999 Online publication: December 16, 1998 ![]() |